To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

1897.] Document No. 20. 12?>
INFECTIOUSNESS OF MILK.
We have recently received from the Secretary a copy of a report
made to the Trustees of the Massachusetts Society for Promoting
Agriculture on the infectiousness of milk, especially that from
tuberculous cows with no lesion of the udder, by Dr. Harold C.
Ernst, Bacteriologist of the Harvard Medical School. The results
of Dr. Ernst's investigations are so interesting and valuable that,
inasmuch as his report will hardly come under the eye of most of
our readers, we feel that we will be doing them a pleasing service
in giving them a summary of it, short and imperfect as it must be
from want of space. After certain preliminary remarks he says :
" The desire of the committee was to determine whether or not
the milk derived from tuberculous cows might contain the infec-tious
material of the disease, and in this way become dangerous
when u-ed as an article of food. And this question was of neces-sity
to be divided into two parts : (1) Whether this infection, if it
existed, was confined to cases in which there was jj-ctual disease of
the udder, and (2) whether it might exist in cases in which the
udder was apparently or actually healthy, but the disease existed
in other parts of the body.
" In regard to the first part of the question plain common sense
showed that the danger of infection was a real one, and besides
this, there existed at the time sufficient experimental datato prove
the fact, so that there is very little dispute that, under the cir-cumstances,
milk should not be used for food, certainly in an
uncooked condition. Evidence since then in the same direction
has constantly accumulated, and now there is hardly a dissenting
opinion that milk from cows with tuberculosis of the udder should
be condemned for food.
"Upon the second point, however, as to whether the milk from
cows with tuberculosis, but not of the udder, might be dangerous,
there was a great diversity of opinion, and almost no experimental
evidence upon which to base what opinion there was. It was in
this direction, therefore, that it was especially desirable to obtain
evidence, and after considerable discussion it was decided that the
main line of experiment should be so conducted that this point
might be decided. In this, as in everything else, it is to be
remembered that one piece of positive evidence obtained under
proper conditions is worth many negative results, and it is for
this reason that so much value may be attached to the results
which have been obtained. These were published in an incom-plete
form and have been widely disseminated. * ^ * It is
unquestionable that they have had much influence in moulding
public opinion in this matter, and at least one direct result has

1897.] Document No. 20. 12?>
INFECTIOUSNESS OF MILK.
We have recently received from the Secretary a copy of a report
made to the Trustees of the Massachusetts Society for Promoting
Agriculture on the infectiousness of milk, especially that from
tuberculous cows with no lesion of the udder, by Dr. Harold C.
Ernst, Bacteriologist of the Harvard Medical School. The results
of Dr. Ernst's investigations are so interesting and valuable that,
inasmuch as his report will hardly come under the eye of most of
our readers, we feel that we will be doing them a pleasing service
in giving them a summary of it, short and imperfect as it must be
from want of space. After certain preliminary remarks he says :
" The desire of the committee was to determine whether or not
the milk derived from tuberculous cows might contain the infec-tious
material of the disease, and in this way become dangerous
when u-ed as an article of food. And this question was of neces-sity
to be divided into two parts : (1) Whether this infection, if it
existed, was confined to cases in which there was jj-ctual disease of
the udder, and (2) whether it might exist in cases in which the
udder was apparently or actually healthy, but the disease existed
in other parts of the body.
" In regard to the first part of the question plain common sense
showed that the danger of infection was a real one, and besides
this, there existed at the time sufficient experimental datato prove
the fact, so that there is very little dispute that, under the cir-cumstances,
milk should not be used for food, certainly in an
uncooked condition. Evidence since then in the same direction
has constantly accumulated, and now there is hardly a dissenting
opinion that milk from cows with tuberculosis of the udder should
be condemned for food.
"Upon the second point, however, as to whether the milk from
cows with tuberculosis, but not of the udder, might be dangerous,
there was a great diversity of opinion, and almost no experimental
evidence upon which to base what opinion there was. It was in
this direction, therefore, that it was especially desirable to obtain
evidence, and after considerable discussion it was decided that the
main line of experiment should be so conducted that this point
might be decided. In this, as in everything else, it is to be
remembered that one piece of positive evidence obtained under
proper conditions is worth many negative results, and it is for
this reason that so much value may be attached to the results
which have been obtained. These were published in an incom-plete
form and have been widely disseminated. * ^ * It is
unquestionable that they have had much influence in moulding
public opinion in this matter, and at least one direct result has